Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Otter Browser

otter-browser.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 98 posts

Re: Otter Browser

#31

Post by spijdar »

brnt wrote: post #25
alessivs wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The web needs independent browsers...[websites] should work on any browser Unfortunately, independence ends with the choice between WebKit (QtWebKit) or Blink (QtWebEngine), albeit with a faithful Opera 12-like interface that's less resource hungry than Vivaldi. Otter is still in development and it shows in some rough spots and occasional crashes.

QtWebkit has been deprecated for a long time, and removed from Qt6. If you use it, you'll run into 'not supported' messages on most Google websites.

Last time I used a QtWebKit browser, I could get around this easily by user agent spoofing. Not sure if the experience was totally perfect, but there were no glaring problems.

Doesn't change the fact that it's been deprecated/removed upstream, though, unfortunately.

Re: Otter Browser

#32

Post by deadmutex »

mustacheemperor wrote: post #19
jordemort wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love to go back to 1999 and see everyone's reaction when I tell them that almost everyone in the 2020s uses a browser derived from Konqueror, and that you have your choice of Konqueror derivatives from Apple, Google, or Microsoft. Whoever named it was more prescient than they realized.

There’s an old turn of phrase, first comes the Navigator, then comes the Explorer, then…

Never knew this! Thanks for sharing.

Re: Otter Browser

#33

Post by nfoz »

Is it safe to trust binaries hosted from sourceforge? Didn't they used to host modified binaries / packages with malware?

Re: Otter Browser

#34

Post by hulitu »

smitty1e wrote: post #7
tmikaeld wrote: post #3

Seems to be a nice UI around QtWebEngine which is based on WebKit or blink (chromium), with quite a solid effort through the years.

> chromium Are there any Google risks for being chromium-based? Honest question here.

When safe browsing is enabled ( by default) it send all your browsing habit to google.

Re: Otter Browser

#35

Post by hulitu »

jordemort wrote: post #17
ibraheemdev wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't find a source, but I know Brave has had upstream Google issues in the past. Unfortunately, from what I've heard, Gecko is not very developer friendly, so Google is pretty much the only option.

I feel like Mozilla's decision not to prioritize support for embedding Gecko ended up being a strategic error in the long-term. Other browsers using Blink don't add directly to Chrome's market share but having it embedded everywhere means that its quirks don't end up being perceived as Chrome-specific. If five different browsers all behave the same way and the sixth one differs, then the sixth one ends up looking lik…

It was no strategic error. They just took the money and told the users to FO. The strategic error was having a board of directors taking decisions about a browser.

Re: Otter Browser

#36

Post by andrewroff »

asddubs wrote: post #30
alessivs wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The web needs independent browsers...[websites] should work on any browser Unfortunately, independence ends with the choice between WebKit (QtWebKit) or Blink (QtWebEngine), albeit with a faithful Opera 12-like interface that's less resource hungry than Vivaldi. Otter is still in development and it shows in some rough spots and occasional crashes.

it would be cool if just one of those smaller browser projects was based on firefox/gecko

There is SeaMonkey - https://www.seamonkey-project.org/

It's essentially a continuation of the Mozilla Suite (formerly Netscape). However they're falling behind on Gecko integration, with the latest version still on Gecko 60 (2018) with backports.

The reality is that Mozilla doesn't focus on embedded applications of Gecko besides Firefox (even Thunderbird is sidelined these days). Projects that are essentially third-party, like SeaMonkey, really have no visibility at all. This is the reason why the Chromium Blink engine has become so widespread, especially when it's been nicely packaged up by the commercially-backed Qt project.

Re: Otter Browser

#37

Post by 6f8986c3 »

3np wrote: post #21
mustacheemperor wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s an old turn of phrase, first comes the Navigator, then comes the Explorer, then…

I guess we’ll all have the browser engines run on Kubernetes in a few years huh?

I think you were going with the “governor” definition of Kubernetes, but “pilot” is closer to the mark.

Re: Otter Browser

#38

Post by boba7 »

userbinator wrote: post #22
geocrasher wrote: post #6

I'm not well versed enough in the Browser Wars to say one thing or another about except this: I like the name. It lends it self to saying "I use the Otter browser" which is not just a great pun but the pun on 'other' defines what Otter is, the "other" browser. The web needs independent browsers. We need to get rid of the idea that websites are designed to work on any one technology. They should work on any browser th…

They should work on any browser that supports the standards. 10-15 years ago I would agree, but now I feel I must add something to that sentence: any browser that supports the standards before they became Google-ified because it is churning the standards so much that its weapon of monopoly is effectively change --- Firefox can barely keep up, and Microsoft already surrendered. What we really need to get rid of is the…

If I see a website that fails to display text with JS disabled I close it and never come back out of respect to blind people who also can't visit that site.

Re: Otter Browser

#39

Post by Springtime »

bartvk wrote: post #20

It's in the Homebrew repo, so installing is as easy as $ brew install otter-browser What's also interesting, is that the tab-close button is on the left of the tab, like every other macOS application. Other browsers (Chrome, Firefox) put it stubbornly on the right.

Vivaldi (Chromium-based) similarly places it on the left for Mac, fwiw, with an optional setting to change it.

Re: Otter Browser

#40

Post by BiteCode_dev »

dleslie wrote: post #29
userbinator wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should work on any browser that supports the standards. 10-15 years ago I would agree, but now I feel I must add something to that sentence: any browser that supports the standards before they became Google-ified because it is churning the standards so much that its weapon of monopoly is effectively change --- Firefox can barely keep up, and Microsoft already surrendered. What we really need to get rid of is the…

And, let's be clear, Google's ability to enact change is a result of their pervasive influence over the internet. It took _years_ for XMLHTTPRequest to become a dominant influence on site design. Google can push new standard changes in fraction of the time because _their services demand it_. > Even webapps, which are more sensitive to browser environments due to their heavy use of JS, should not stop working on an ol…

Well, it's not like the entire web community haven't warned about it for the last 10 years.

At this point, what can we do?

Post reply on HN